Rename project/package

[patcon]

Reticketed from other comments

From: #5 (review)

We should keep "red-dwarf" as the name [rather than "red-dwarf-democracy"], it's too long otherwise. We don't need to explain it in the first line of the README, it's OK. Software projects always have funny names anyways :D. Same for the description of the repo, it's not necessary that's it's there (also DIM and RED does not make "red-dwarf"? I'm confused!)

From: #7 (comment)

Despite its package name (which I already mention I think we should change to something more neutral in the long term, or unify!)

cc: @nicobao

Todos

• rename git repo to red-dwarf
• set module name to reddwarf
• deploy first package release to pypi Cut a first dev release #12
• claim red-dwarf namespace on PyPI #cantdo
• claim temporary red-dwarf-democracy PyPI namespace (see Rename project/package #10 (comment))
• ask previous owner about acquiring reddwarf namespace on PyPI Rename project/package #10 (comment)
• arrange transfer of reddwarf namespace to patcon - REVIEW Mar 12
• delete reddwarf project namespace
• create new red-dwarf project namespace with first release
• ask agora if migration path from red-dwarf-democracy is important to them. re: https://github.com/simonw/pypi-rename
• push migration release to red-dwarf-democracy project
• optional: delete red-dwarf-democracy project namespace

[patcon]

To clarify, red-dwarf-democracy is just the github repo name, which I wanted to be legible (hence dashes instead of reddwarf) and descriptive (hence -democracy suffix) even though the name hints at astronomical and so is non-descriptive.

The python package would not be called that. I'm unopinionated on reddwarf vs red_dwarf, just sorta arbitrarily disliked underscores in python packages :)

(also DIM and RED does not make "red-dwarf"? I'm confused!)

Red dwarfs are dim red stars. Sorry, maybe I'm misunderstanding the misunderstanding 🙃

https://www.space.com/23772-red-dwarf-stars.html

Proposal

red-dwarf-democracy as github repo name. package renamed to red_dwarf.

Open to counterproposal!

[nicobao]

To clarify, red-dwarf-democracy is just the github repo name, which I wanted to be legible (hence dashes instead of reddwarf) and descriptive (hence -democracy suffix) even though the name hints at astronomical and so is non-descriptive.

Yes I see. I personally don't think we need to be explicit about democracy in the repo name, especially as the organization name is already "polis-community"!

The python package would not be called that. I'm unopinionated on reddwarf vs red_dwarf, just sorta arbitrarily disliked underscores in python packages :)

(also DIM and RED does not make "red-dwarf"? I'm confused!)

Red dwarfs are dim red stars. Sorry, maybe I'm misunderstanding the misunderstanding 🙃

OK I see!

https://www.space.com/23772-red-dwarf-stars.html

Proposal

red-dwarf-democracy as github repo name. package renamed to red_dwarf.

Open to counterproposal!

In Python, package names use dash, unlike variable, function or module names:

https://packaging.python.org/en/latest/specifications/name-normalization/#name-normalization

Though tbh there are lots of inconsistencies there too, and mixing _ and - between module and package is objectively annoying:

https://discuss.python.org/t/are-there-any-naming-conventions-for-package-names/47746/2

PEP 8 mentions not using any underscores is encouraged for module name:

Package and Module Names

Modules should have short, all-lowercase names. Underscores can be used in the module name if it improves readability. Python packages should also have short, all-lowercase names, although the use of underscores is discouraged.

See:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/2852305

https://www.reddit.com/r/Python/s/vB7KEM0alt

From https://stackoverflow.com/a/2852362:

A quick peak at my site-packages directory shows that multiword names are commonly just run together (e.g., setuptools, sqlalchemy)

My take:

• reddwarf could work for both module and package name even though the double d is error-prone
• I vote for either
  • red-dwarf for package name and red_dwarf for module name and red-dwarf for repository name (my personal favorite) OR
  • reddwarf for all the names: module and package name and repository name for consistency sake

@patcon choose whatever you see fit but it seems like reddwarf wins #democracy 😂

I'm kinda scared of mistyping to redwarf though and not realizing it 😭

[nicobao]

From: #7 (comment)

Despite its package name (which I already mention I think we should change to something more neutral in the long term, or unify!)

=> For info I was referring to agora in agora.reddwarf here. So it's actually a namespace not a package name I guess? I'm confused.

[patcon]

mixing _ and - between module and package is objectively annoying

haha agree

Thanks for the research -- I didn't know about most of the PEP recommendations

• I vote for either

  1. red-dwarf for package name and red_dwarf for module name and red-dwarf for repository name (my personal favorite) OR
  2. reddwarf for all the names: module and package name and repository name for consistency sake

@patcon choose whatever you see fit but it seems like reddwarf wins #democracy 😂

haha wait. You said you "personal favorite" is (i), but it seems that (ii) "wins #democracy"? :)

just so I properly understand, what's you own pref? Again, thanks for diving in

[nicobao]

mixing _ and - between module and package is objectively annoying

haha agree

Thanks for the research -- I didn't know about most of the PEP recommendations

• I vote for either

  1. red-dwarf for package name and red_dwarf for module name and red-dwarf for repository name (my personal favorite) OR
  2. reddwarf for all the names: module and package name and repository name for consistency sake

@patcon choose whatever you see fit but it seems like reddwarf wins #democracy 😂

haha wait. You said you "personal favorite" is (i), but it seems that (ii) "wins #democracy"? :)

just so I properly understand, what's you own pref? Again, thanks for diving in

My own preference is (i) with red_dwarf/red-dwarf it feels easier to read so it's less error-prone (ok except for mixing dashes and underscores depending on context, but this is true for every Python module/package). Seems like it is the standard for two words (actually realizing that standard is probably red-dwarf for package name and reddwarf for module name--so complicated....)

I said #democracy because you like (ii) and I also like (ii) because it is simple and it's also standard (sqlalchemy not sql_alchemy, etc), so it felt like the consensus pick 😂 which makes me like it even more 😂

So to summarize, go for (ii) and reddwarf everywhere 🌌

[patcon]

Haha thanks. I'm not sure how I misled, but my personal fave is more like (i) too :)

repo name	red-dwarf-democracy
package name	red-dwarf
module name	reddwarf (or red_dwarf)

The repo name being descriptive and easily readable is my main interest, and everything else just follows whatever seems standard.

Am I understanding correctly that you also prefer this (minus the "democracy" suffix, that I realize isn't your ideal)

[patcon]

Repo name is the easiest thing to change, so we could change it back to red-dwarf for now, so long as no one's annoyed if I pitch a rename later: Among other things, I want us to show up prominently when ppl search "democracy" on GitHub (which I suspect is increasingly common), and the SEO of dashed slugs of words in urls.

[nicobao]

Haha thanks. I'm not sure how I misled, but my personal fave is more like (i) too :)

repo name	red-dwarf-democracy
package name	red-dwarf
module name	reddwarf (or red_dwarf)

The repo name being descriptive and easily readable is my main interest, and everything else just follows whatever seems standard.

Am I understanding correctly that you also prefer this (minus the "democracy" suffix, that I realize isn't your ideal)

I suggest:

repo name	red-dwarf
package name	red-dwarf
module name	reddwarf

(I initially suggested red_dwarf for the module name but I finally prefer reddwarf because it's more standard according to PIP.)

[patcon]

K sounds good to me! Will leave open until done

[patcon]

Ugh. reddwarf is a dormant namespace controlled by open stack foundation: https://pypi.org/project/reddwarf/

This means that red-dwarf is too close to be used:

patcon at MacBook-Pro in ~/repos/red-dwarf (main●) (.venv) 
$ uv publish 
warning: `uv publish` is experimental and may change without warning
Publishing 2 files https://upload.pypi.org/legacy/
Enter username ('__token__' if using a token): __token__
Enter password: 
Uploading red_dwarf-0.1.1-py3-none-any.whl (19.8KiB)
error: Failed to publish `dist/red_dwarf-0.1.1-py3-none-any.whl` to https://upload.pypi.org/legacy/
  Caused by: Upload failed with status code 400 Bad Request. Server says: 400 The name 'red-dwarf' is too similar to an existing project. See https://pypi.org/help/#project-name for more information.

For now, I'll create it under red-dwarf-democracy, but happy to change to something else if red-dwarf can't be acquired soon.

Follow up

As per official docs on claiming stale package namespaces, it's recommended to reach out to owner first. That's OpenStack Foundation, which is a large org and so might be slow.

I've reached out to Tom Fifield, an OpenStack community manager, who seems to be an informal ambassador for Taiwan and fan of Audrey Tang: https://x.com/patcon_/status/1897092867124085165

cc: @fifieldt

[fifieldt]

Thanks for the ping @patcon - let me fire some emails.

[patcon]

i am in awe of your rapid response. thank you!

[patcon]

@fifieldt's collaborator is helping us move this along 🙌

https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/[email protected]/thread/UIPSKKPCRH6E6ZVTSJW2UQPMNJ7ETELG/

If nobody objects in the next week, I'll move forward with the ownership transfer process.

[patcon]

Published at https://pypi.org/project/red-dwarf/ 🎉

Going to leave this open until red-dwarf-democracy is removed or redirected